"D300s is just a slightly updated already overpriced D300 and no one in his right mind would pay 1800 for it when he could get full frame Canon 5DII, Sony α900 or Nikon D700 for just a bit more." - I would, as I don't need FX as DX gives me a 1.5 enlargement factor; however I agree with You that the price should be lower, IMHO d300 should be priced around $1200-$1300 body only

What I would really like from Nikon is to stop considering their customers morons and really try and make something new and innovative.
Look at all those so called new products they are announcing these days. It is 5 years old technology in a new package and priced sky-high.
D300s is just a slightly updated already overpriced D300 and no one in his right mind would pay 1800 for it when he could get full frame Canon 5DII, Sony α900 or Nikon D700 for just a bit more.
D3000 is actually D40x with slightly better AF but for much higher price.
Ok, they improved 5 year old 18-200 and 70-200 and they should have, but why rising prices?
How successful they are could be seen from sales numbers of D5000, for just a bit less then D90 almost no one is going for it.
Nikon currently has only one dSLR hit product and that is D90, and if they continue like this I think we will soon have a LG branch company named LGN and N would be everything that is left from Nikon.

I would like to see a development of a wireless (wifi kind) connection between Bodies, Flashes, Remotes and Computers. The current way that it is done is simply a joke. If you want to shoot outside and control your flash remotely you have to get expensive wireless controllers from either Pocketwizard or RadioPopper. And for app $ 800 (WT-4A wireless transmitter) you can have the enjoyment of wifi connection to your computer.

Now make the next DSLR and advanced P&S with build in Wifi, same for next model of flashes. Then offer controllers for current flashes so that they can work with this new system. Sorry Pocketwizard and RadioPopper this would not be so great for you, but then you have Canon and the other brands

Then, they could develop moderate speed, DX, long telephoto lenses that don't break the back or the bank. I'm thinking 300 or 400/4.5 or 5.6 with VRII and small TCs to match. It would be great if they focused close too, perhaps 1:2.

I'd also like a remake of the 200/4 macro with VR.

I couldn't be happier with my D90 (perfect camera except for inability to meter AI-s lenses - need D300s for that), 10-24 (wonderful lens), 16-85 (never leave home without it - most used lens), 70-300 (small for range, same 62mm filter thread as 16-85, and sufficient sharpness 70-200), 105 AFS/VR Macro (second most used lens, heavy but perfect bokeh, contrast, macro working length, etc.). If I'm worried about light, I carry SB-400 and 35/1.8. I almost never use the 10.5 and 60 macro - the 10-24 and 105, although different, are better for most of my uses.

If money were no object, I'd collect the TS lenses, then add a D700 and the 14-24.

I would like to know when Nikon (if they are ever going to) are going to make an adapter for the Metz falshguns. I own a top of the range Metz and would love to utilise it's worth with this beautiful new D90?

If I could shoot anything, It would be a D3+D3x
200-400 VR
200mm f/2 VR
10-18mm FX (I know that it isn't real...)
200mm Micro-nikkor
600mm VR
2000mm Reflex-Nikkor
And throw in a 18-55 VR, and a 50mm 1.4 AF-D + a bunch of Hasselbald Medium Format dSLR stuff.

yes it does and I love this lens (probably one of my favorite) Sharp. Sharp.
but. I feel sometime that Im missing the VR in some of he pics.
I shoot concerts some time with no flash and almost no light. the D700 does the job well
Hi iso and Im fine, the Vr would will give it the extra edge that i I need.